ArticleFrontiers in psychology2018
Adaptation Aftereffects in the Perception of Crabs and Lobsters as Examples of Complex Natural Objects.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To recognize a familiar object, incoming perceptual information is matched against object representations in memory. Mounting evidence suggests that these representations are not stable, but adapt flexibly to recently encountered perceptual information. This is evident in the form of aftereffects, where prolonged exposure to one object (adaptor) influences perception of the next (test stimulus). So far, adaptation aftereffects have been mainly shown for human faces and simple geometric shapes, and it has been concluded that face aftereffects partially derive from shape adaptation. However, it is largely unknown whether adaptation aftereffects generalize to other categories of complex, naturalistic biological objects, and if so, whether these effects can be explained by shape adaptation. To answer these questions, we conducted three experiments in which images of crabs and lobsters were presented in two versions: as complex, naturalistic images, or reduced to their simplified geometric shapes. In Experiment 1, we found robust adaptation aftereffects for the complex versions of the images, indicating that adaptation aftereffects generalize to animate objects other than faces. Experiment 2 showed adaptation aftereffects for the simplified stimuli, replicating previous findings on geometric shapes. Experiment 3 demonstrated that adaptation to the simplified animal shapes results in aftereffects on the complex naturalistic stimuli. Comparisons between experiments revealed that aftereffects were largest in the first experiment, in which complex stimuli served as adaptor and test stimuli. Together, these experiments show that the magnitude of adaptation aftereffects depends on the complexity of the adaptor, but not on that of the test stimuli, and that shape adaptation plays a role in - but cannot entirely account for - the object aftereffects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.